Comments

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@mail.ru> wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@mail.ru>
You are not doing only what you describe in the Subject line.
It would be nice to provide a commit log.

> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@mail.ru> wrote:> >> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@mail.ru>> > You are not doing only what you describe in the Subject line.> > It would be nice to provide a commit log.
Is it worth it to make the next version of the patch?
On my opinion, everything is obvious from the name.
---

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 04:11:01PM +0400, Alexander Shiyan wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@mail.ru> wrote:> > >> > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@mail.ru>> > > > You are not doing only what you describe in the Subject line.> > > > It would be nice to provide a commit log.> > Is it worth it to make the next version of the patch?> On my opinion, everything is obvious from the name.
Half of it is obvious, but the part in which you add gpio_nand_set_wp()
and use it is not related to the subject. It's really a separate bit of
refactoring, it seems, which could be valid only if you mention it.
Otherwise, a subject-line-only commit message means the patch must do
one thing only.
You can just resend this one patch, or even split it into two patches. I
believe the rest should be OK. (I'm looking now.)
Thanks,
Brian